You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum. This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.

He does what a lot of us did at some point. He assumed a linear progression of a players development. It just doesn't work like that. Players don't continue to get better all the time, and even if they do, it's not the same magnitude all the time.

Mark Sanchez is a prime example. We all thought he was going to keep improving after those playoff games. Well, sometimes players don't get better. He's gotten worse, really.

Greene is another example. We all thought he was going to be a great player, but sometimes players don't progress very much.

He does what a lot of us did at some point. He assumed a linear progression of a players development. It just doesn't work like that. Players don't continue to get better all the time, and even if they do, it's not the same magnitude all the time.

Mark Sanchez is a prime example. We all thought he was going to keep improving after those playoff games. Well, sometimes players don't get better. He's gotten worse, really.

Greene is another example. We all thought he was going to be a great player, but sometimes players don't progress very much.

It's all debatable, but when it's all said and done I think the Jets did a poor job of developing him.

I look at it this way: how much better would Matt Stafford or Josh Freeman fair if they were in Mark's shoes... I don't think either would be much different.

Although I think Rex is a great coach and deserves to stay, his philosophy is flawed. Either he (or Tannenbaum) believed that getting one "blue-chip" skill player in Holmes would be good enough, but it isn't unless you have a top-tier QB.

Josh Freeman had one bad year and what did the team do? Went out and signed Vincent Jackson, Carl Nicks, Dallas Clark, and drafted Doug Martin. They understood that their young players (Freeman, Williams) are still developing, and they needed to bring in more talent in order to take the pressure off of those individuals. As a result Josh Freeman is having a terrific comeback year and Mike Williams is establishing himself as one of the best WR2's in football.

Matt Stafford's career started very slow with injuries and lack of production, but Detroit kept building the offense so he would be able to succeed by year 3. Since 2009 Detroit has brought in free agents Nate Burleson and Tony Scheffler, and have drafted 9 skill position players. Though not all have panned out, it's a dedicated philosophy to put players around Stafford so he can succeed (it helps having Calvin Johnson at his disposal as well). The Lions are a talented playoff-caliber football team who have lost 8 games due to poor situational football. Stafford has come back to life, but he still leads the NFL in yards and appears to be an NFL starter for a long time.

How have the Jets been dedicated to Mark Sanchez? We all knew Sanchez's development was going to take a little longer because of his limited collegian experience, so it was necessary to surround him with talent on talent on talent. We all acknowledged this. They started off well by acquiring Braylon Edwards, trading for Santonio Holmes (and owning him little guaranteed money), and signing LaDainian Tomlinson, but were never devoted to drafting skill position players (just 4 sub-par RBs all in the 3rd round or later, Jeremy Kerley, and Stephen Hill) and didn't replace positions of need. I think Stephen Hill can be a phenomenal player, my problem is that he should've been more a role player year one before throwing him into the fire right away. The transition into the NFL was always going to be great, and for one reason or another the Jets ignored this. For years I feel like the Jets knew internally that Shonn Greene couldn't be a true workhorse back but they ignored it, finally admitting in the past few weeks that we need to implement a time share.

Sure we have enough players to merit a 10 win team with a top tier QB, but when you know your QB is Mark Sanchez, you should be aware that he needs to have more reliable weapons at his disposal.

He does what a lot of us did at some point. He assumed a linear progression of a players development. It just doesn't work like that. Players don't continue to get better all the time, and even if they do, it's not the same magnitude all the time.

Mark Sanchez is a prime example. We all thought he was going to keep improving after those playoff games. Well, sometimes players don't get better. He's gotten worse, really.

Greene is another example. We all thought he was going to be a great player, but sometimes players don't progress very much.

It's all debatable, but when it's all said and done I think the Jets did a poor job of developing him.

I look at it this way: how much better would Matt Stafford or Josh Freeman fair if they were in Mark's shoes... I don't think either would be much different.

Although I think Rex is a great coach and deserves to stay, his philosophy is flawed. Either he (or Tannenbaum) believed that getting one "blue-chip" skill player in Holmes would be good enough, but it isn't unless you have a top-tier QB.

Josh Freeman had one bad year and what did the team do? Went out and signed Vincent Jackson, Carl Nicks, Dallas Clark, and drafted Doug Martin. They understood that their young players (Freeman, Williams) are still developing, and they needed to bring in more talent in order to take the pressure off of those individuals. As a result Josh Freeman is having a terrific comeback year and Mike Williams is establishing himself as one of the best WR2's in football.

Matt Stafford's career started very slow with injuries and lack of production, but Detroit kept building the offense so he would be able to succeed by year 3. Since 2009 Detroit has brought in free agents Nate Burleson and Tony Scheffler, and have drafted 9 skill position players. Though not all have panned out, it's a dedicated philosophy to put players around Stafford so he can succeed (it helps having Calvin Johnson at his disposal as well). The Lions are a talented playoff-caliber football team who have lost 8 games due to poor situational football. Stafford has come back to life, but he still leads the NFL in yards and appears to be an NFL starter for a long time.

How have the Jets been dedicated to Mark Sanchez? We all knew Sanchez's development was going to take a little longer because of his limited collegian experience, so it was necessary to surround him with talent on talent on talent. We all acknowledged this. They started off well by acquiring Braylon Edwards, trading for Santonio Holmes (and owning him little guaranteed money), and signing LaDainian Tomlinson, but were never devoted to drafting skill position players (just 4 sub-par RBs all in the 3rd round or later, Jeremy Kerley, and Stephen Hill) and didn't replace positions of need. I think Stephen Hill can be a phenomenal player, my problem is that he should've been more a role player year one before throwing him into the fire right away. The transition into the NFL was always going to be great, and for one reason or another the Jets ignored this. For years I feel like the Jets knew internally that Shonn Greene couldn't be a true workhorse back but they ignored it, finally admitting in the past few weeks that we need to implement a time share.

Sure we have enough players to merit a 10 win team with a top tier QB, but when you know your QB is Mark Sanchez, you should be aware that he needs to have more reliable weapons at his disposal.

I think the problems rest with Tanny. He made us such cap stricken that we have no room to maneuver. We can't just go out and sign FA Nicks, Jackson, etc. And the guys who we did give contracts to have been pretty poor (compared to what we have expected out of them). Holmes, Ferguson, and arguably Mangold (he is still great but he isn't the top center that we signed him to). With all those poor contracts and players not living up to what we expect them to it literally killed our offense.

If Holmes and Ferguson panned out to what we thought they would be, our offense wouldn't be powerhouse but it would be serviceable.

If Holmes and Ferguson panned out to what we thought they would be, our offense wouldn't be powerhouse but it would be serviceable.

Come on. Ferguson is one of the last people I would complain about. He is a borderline top 5 LT, despite not being as good against the run.

Idk, I would say he is safely outside of the top 5. He is also I think the 2nd or 3rd highest paid LT in the league. He is still our of our best offensive players but he is under-performing his contract. If he was paid adequately/appropriately we could use that extra money for a new guard or a new receiver or a new running back, etc. We are paying him like a top 3 tackle but he isn't performing that well.

And there is a huge drop between him and the next tackle in terms of cash.

If Holmes and Ferguson panned out to what we thought they would be, our offense wouldn't be powerhouse but it would be serviceable.

Come on. Ferguson is one of the last people I would complain about. He is a borderline top 5 LT, despite not being as good against the run.

Idk, I would say he is safely outside of the top 5. He is also I think the 2nd or 3rd highest paid LT in the league. He is still our of our best offensive players but he is under-performing his contract. If he was paid adequately/appropriately we could use that extra money for a new guard or a new receiver or a new running back, etc. We are paying him like a top 3 tackle but he isn't performing that well.

And there is a huge drop between him and the next tackle in terms of cash.

I wouldn't really complain about D'Brick. Holmes, yes. But not Ferguson. I think that he is a Top 10 LT, Top 3 LT as far as pass blocking goes. His run blocking is average._________________Jamison.'s Gallery

If Holmes and Ferguson panned out to what we thought they would be, our offense wouldn't be powerhouse but it would be serviceable.

Come on. Ferguson is one of the last people I would complain about. He is a borderline top 5 LT, despite not being as good against the run.

Idk, I would say he is safely outside of the top 5. He is also I think the 2nd or 3rd highest paid LT in the league. He is still our of our best offensive players but he is under-performing his contract. If he was paid adequately/appropriately we could use that extra money for a new guard or a new receiver or a new running back, etc. We are paying him like a top 3 tackle but he isn't performing that well.

And there is a huge drop between him and the next tackle in terms of cash.

I wouldn't really complain about D'Brick. Holmes, yes. But not Ferguson. I think that he is a Top 10 LT, Top 3 LT as far as pass blocking goes. His run blocking is average.

When you are being paid top 3 money, you better be top 10. Simple fact is, he isn't living up to his price tag. I'm not saying we should get rid of him or anything like that but when you invest in someone and expect them to be top 3 and they fall short of that, that is part of the problem.

And it wouldn't be a problem if it was just one player but ALL of our big contracts aren't panning out. That was the larger part of my statement